Friday, March 29, 2013

I am really happy to have wonderful guest post here from Heather Schopp. Heather can often be found on Karen Campbell's wonderful page - www.thatmom.com - Heather has a number of lectures on Karen's page from some of the conferences that she has taken part in. My recommendation? Listen to everything from Heather and Karen that you can get your ears around!

Heather is one of the most powerful and elegant writers you will find anywhere on God's great blogosphere. Check out some of her work here below.

Jesus Christ--our true calling

We tend to make rigid fences of
our denominations. The denomination's list of doctrines become the
acceptable "truth"--anyone outside that fence is at best not as
Christian, at worst condemned. People within the fence sometimes throw
the word "heretic" at anyone who doesn't interpret the Bible according
to their code. So we stand behind our fences and feel safe as the
"chosen" or the "one true church."

But who am I to think I have the corner on truth?

My
friend said it well: "I'm a Christian first, and I happen to feel
comfortable practicing my faith as a Lutheran." ....not because Luther
had all the correct answers, not because non-Lutherans are all
wrong -- but simply because she feels content there and is growing in her
faith. I too attend a denominational church, and I think it's natural
and appropriate to find a place where it feels comfortable to worship,
where one shares a common belief system with other attenders.

We
are called not to take on the identity of our pastor or priest or church
or denomination -- but to take on the identity of Jesus Christ. We have
been given minds that question and doubt and are capable of learning and
growing and changing -- are we allowing those questions to spring forth,
the doubts to arise, that learning and changing and growing to happen? If we sit in our churches as mindless vessels, letting the speaker pour
in his/her thoughts, we have set aside the instincts, the beautiful
minds God has given us. How can that be honoring to Him? He alone has
the corner on truth, is Truth itself.

More and more I see knowing
Jesus, understanding truth, as a process. There is not a certain magic
prayer that flips a switch and makes one a Christian, not a code that
when followed grants a heavenly entrance, not a list of doctrines that
when accepted puts a person on the "right path."

Jesus will is to draw
all men to Himself -- we can resist, we can misunderstand, but He will not
stop drawing and revealing His light. Our churches and denominations
should enhance that process, should help us to understand and love Jesus
and love others more.

When we let churches/denominations define
our faith, when we allow them to put a barrier between us and other
Christians, between us and the world, we do a disservice to our faith,
to others, to the truth, to Jesus Christ. We should not fear questions
of faith and doctrine, differences of beliefs and convictions -- they are
opportunities for us to grow and draw closer to Jesus, Who remains the
unchanging truth.

Saturday, March 23, 2013

When I still
lived in America, I spent quite a bit of my time there living in Southern
California. During that time, when I was in my mid-20's, I had a close friend
who attended a very conservative Amish-type church. This church was
a part of a group of similar churches located in the SW part of America and the
church had its roots if I remember correctly in the German tradition.

On several
occasions, I had the pleasure of visiting the church and worshipping with the
community.Upon arrival
and before the service commenced, they gave you food to eat. You would sit down
at a type of lunch counter they had in the church and have a sandwich before
the service.

These dear
people were very conservative Biblically. The women kept their hair covered,
wore very conservative plain clothing, no make-up or jewelry or the like. Men
wore very simple conservative suits and simple clothes.It was a
community of believers really seeking to live out the Christian life as they understood
it.

When it came
time to enter the service, we would go inside and then the men and women would
be separated and sat on separate sides of the church.Then, the
service would begin with the preaching elder standing up and he would then randomly
open a King James Version of the Bible to any section of Scripture and start to
give a message ad-hoc on whatever text he turned to.

Everything
seemed fine, until ....

Everything
about the church and the people seemed totally fine, but then something
happened which absolutely caused me to do a double take.

We had arrived
at the church early and had gone in to eat something before others, but when we
were done and were moving to the sanctuary, I saw something that caused the eye
brows to be raised, and not slightly. I was walking
by two grown men who proceeded to kiss each other on the mouth!

Now, let's be
clear. They did so in a very kind of dignified way and they sort of closed
their lips and just kind of "kissed" each other very quickly and
simply. It was did not involve any other body contact at all, just the simple
"kiss," but it was two men kissing each other on the mouth!

"What did
I just see?"

Upon seeing
this, I sort of turned to my friend and said: "I just saw those two guys
sort of kiss each other? What in the heck is going on with that?" Then he
told me, "Oh yeah, it's no big deal, they are just following Paul command
to "Greet each other with a holy kiss." (This is no small matter
either because it is mentioned in the New Testament four times - Romans 16:16;
I Corinthians 16:20; II Corinthians 13:12; I Thessalonians 5:26)

But I came back
and said: "But, they are dudes and they are sort of kissing each other in a
very kind of creepy way?" He said, "Well, to them, that is how they
have been taught to do it and it is perfectly fine and in fact, it is
"holy."

Now, note that
only the men greeted each other in this fashion. No male/female kissing of any
kind took place at all.

But this
example points to a very important issue of how culture shapes how we look at
the Biblical text.According to
the tradition of this church, this is how their founding community interpreted
these verses and the way in which the "kiss" was undertaken was on
the lips between male members of the church.

A more
authentic approach according to what Paul was talking about

Now, I think
that most people will admit that people here in Israel are probably closer to
the way that things were done in ancient times by sheer geography. It should
not be unreasonable to think that after two thousand years, the people who live
in Jerusalem today probably have a closer connection to the ancient Biblical traditions
than do people living in Southern California, everything else being equal. A
good example of this is as follows.

Recently, I was on my way to Jerusalem and as I waited
for a bus to come, I saw a car stop in front of me and a young man about 18 got
out and greeted another young man right in front of me. He did so using the
traditional Arab “kiss”, a cheek to cheek approach. Generally speaking, you
find men doing it to relatives or friends at special occasions or when they
have not seen each other in some time.

Normally, the parties will “kiss” the
other person's cheek two or three times, but for relatives or very special
events like weddings or the like, you will see them “kissing” each other more
than two or three times. Such was the case of these two young men who looked as
if they were not related, but that they had not seen each other in some time. I
heard what they were talking about and one boy told the other that he was going
to visit a nearby village and his friend insisted very vigorously that he allow
him to take him to his destination. Then, they both got in the car and left.

So, now how does all of this relate to the issue that serves as the heading
for this short section: “Greet each other with a holy kiss?” The point is, we
find this phrase used by Paul four times. These are: Romans 16:16; I
Corinthians 16:20; II Corinthians 13:12 and I Thessalonians 5:26. Now isn’t it
interesting that Paul encouraged these Gentile churches to greet each other in
this fashion. Certainly, they did touch each other in the process and more
importantly, Paul himself must have been “greeting people with a holy kiss”;
that is, he was physically touching Gentile people! Note in I Corinthians
16:19, he even mentions “Aquila and Prisca (a woman)" and then he urges them to
greet each other in this fashion.

Now, we can get into long discussions about the issues of family purity
and what may have been taking place, but what is clear is that people interpret
Paul very differently based upon their own experience and what they think he
means with the phrase "Greet each other with a holy kiss" and to some
people, it means that in the 21st century, some Christian communities in America
have men kissing each other on the mouth and here in the Middle East, referring
to the same text, you have people "kissing" each other cheek to
cheek.

In my view, I am more in favor of the Middle Eastern model.

Now, let's ask ourselves to compare this issue to that of corporal
punishment/spanking/smacking?

Here we have to ask ourselves? How do we understand the texts in
Proverbs? Do we understand them according to the way St. Paul did (the Middle
Eastern way)? Or are we off in a kind of late European way of understanding?

We have an example of what Paul thought of the rod in fact when he said:

"What do
you wish? Shall I come to you with a rod, or with love in a spirit of
gentleness?" (I Corinthians 4:21)

We really have
to search our hearts and ask ourselves do we really know what the Bible means
today and can we really be sure that we are just not like two dudes kissing
each other on the lips?

This is a
reasonable question that all advocating corporal punishment/smacking/spanking
need to ask themselves because the stakes are so much higher than some guy seeing
something take place and feeling a bit odd. Download Samuel Martin's free ebook - Thy Rod and Thy Staff, They Comfort Me: Christians and the Spanking Controversy here - http://whynottrainachild.com/2013/06/22/download-martins-book/

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

I
think that we are all fairly familiar with the general history of St. Paul and
his life. We understand from the New Testament that St. Paul’s family, as far
as the Jewish world was concerned, must have been considered quite well off.
They were Roman citizens. In fact, he went to study Jewish law and
jurisprudence in Jerusalem from an early age. He even mentions that he “studied
at the feel of Gamliel.” (Acts 22:3) Note the following synopsis.

“In
this article we aren’t so much interested in Paul’s biography as we are in
relating his theological background to his role as apostle of grace. We know
that Paul (then Saul) was born in Tarsus, the son of a Pharisee who was also a
Roman citizen. Paul went to Jerusalem early in life to study with the great
rabbi Gamaliel. In his first Jerusalem trial (Acts 22:2), Paul introduced
himself to the Sanhedrin as he who learned "at the feet of Gamaliel."
This phrase means more than we would take it for at first glance. It sounds
like Paul is giving homage to his teacher, and that he hung on Gamaliel’s every
word. Actually, Paul used this figure of speech to remind the Sanhedrin just
how important a figure Saul of Tarsus was, even from his earliest years in
Jerusalem. In the synagogues, students sat in an arrangement that reflected
their academic position. We have a description of a typical academic synagogue
setting in which Paul would have studied:

"The
academy head presided, seated on a chair or on special mats. In the front rows
opposite him sat the important scholars, including his colleagues or
outstanding pupils, and behind them all the other scholars. When the academies
grew larger, particularly in Palestine, the order of the seating was based on a
precisely defined hierarchy. In the first row sat the great scholars, in the
second row the less important sages, and so on" (Adin Steinsaltz, The
Essential Talmud).

We
can, therefore, picture the apostle as a young man, seated front and center, at
the very feet of the renowned and revered Gamaliel. Already at the top of his
class, he was on his way to becoming the leading Pharisee.

Paul
also wrote to the Galatians (1:14) that he was extremely zealous for the law,
and his academic accomplishments exceeded that of many of his peers. This may
have been a humble way of saying that he really excelled above everyone when it
came to legalistic knowledge. Along with other mentions of his
"qualifications" (Phil. 3:4-6, Acts 22:3, 23:6) we can assume that
Paul had no superiors in the world of Pharisaism. Had not God intervened in his
life, he was destined to become the next great rabbinical leader. Just as men
like Gamaliel, Hillel, Rabbi Akiba, and many others have become Talmudic
legends, so also Saul of Tarsus would have doubtless joined the list. Perhaps
he may have achieved the great title of Rabbi Saul of Tarsus.” (http://www.tidings.org/studies/legalism1199.htm)

No
doubt, of the people who make up the writers of the Holy Bible, St. Paul was
certainly the most educated. But did he make physical tents for a living?
According to the book of Acts, Paul is termed as a “tentmaker.” (Greek: skenopoios) However, isn’t it
interesting that find this word used only one time in the Bible? In addition,
note that according to the Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and
Ecclesiastical Literature, in the article “Paul,” vol. VII, pg. 789, it says:
“This trade is described by Luke as that of a skenopoios, a word regarding the meaning of which there has been no
small difference of opinion.” Maybe this word does not actually mean
“tentmaker?”

Yes,
Paul may very well have been an actual tentmaker, but note what Ronald Hock of
UCLA says: “That Paul was a tentmaker (skenopoios)
we learn only from Luke (cf. Acts 18:3). Although there is no reason to
doubt Luke at this point (cf. E. Haenchen; The Acts of the Apostles: A
Commentary [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1971] 538), the nature of Paul’s trade is still not clear. Of the two options –
weaving tent clothe from goat’s hair (cilicium)
or cutting and sewing leather to make tents – the latter is to be preferred.”[1]

We can
see from these points that it is not exactly clear what Paul’s precise
occupation was. However, it appears to have involved leather cutting, which may
have been used in the fashioning of tents.

Let us
be clear though on one thing. St. Paul, being that most educated of all of the
Biblical writers, he no doubt was involved in the transmission of written records
(including his own) to the Christian Church. Note the following discussion that
my father made concerning Paul and his academic pursuits, which related in a
practical way to the construction of codex form books. Those of you who have
read the book Restoring the Original Bible will remember this important
discussion:

“Timothy and John Mark were asked by Paul
to fetch three important items and bring them to Rome. "When you come,
bring the cloak [Greek: phelonen] I
left with Carpus, and the scrolls, especially the parchments" (II Timothy
4:13). It is interesting that the phelonen,
usually considered to be a heavy outer garment, would be mentioned alongside
the paper scrolls (actually scrolls made from the papyrus plant) and the
parchments (these were animal skins on which permanent documents were normally
written). It seems odd that a heavy coat would be in the same context with
literary documents. Most scholars, however, point out that Paul wanted Timothy
and Mark to hurry to Rome before winter (verse 21) and that he probably wanted
the phelonen which he left with
Carpus in order to keep himself warm when the cold would set in.

This
may be the case, but there are some difficulties with this interpretation. The
truth is, the word phelonen had
another meaning in the Greek world at the time, and it is one that is
intimately connected with scrolls and parchments.

Vincent,
in his Word Studies in the New Testament, has this to say about the word phelonen."Hesychius explains it as originally a
case for keeping the mouthpieces of wind-instruments; thence, generally, a box.
Phrynicus, a Greek sophist of the second half of the third century, defines it
as ‘a receptacle for books, clothes, silver, or anything else.' Phelonen was a wrapper of parchments,
and was translated figuratively in Latin by toga or paenula ‘a cloak,'
sometimes of leather; also the wrapping which a shopkeeper put round fish or
olives; also the parchment cover for papyrus rolls.

Accordingly
it is claimed that Timothy in 4:13 is bidden to bring, not a cloak, but a
roll-case. So the Syriac Version." (p.326)

The
fact is, the word phelonen can mean
either a cloak (and it is commonly used that way in Greek literature) or it
could mean a receptacle for the placement of scrolls and parchments. It is the
context which must determine what the apostle Paul meant by the use of phelonen
in II Timothy 4:13. Since the word is found right next to scrolls and
parchments, the immediate context would suggest a "book cover" a
"book case" or "book slip" into which scrolls or pages of
books were placed. As Vincent stated, the Syriac Version of the New Testament
understood it in that manner.

Chrysostom,
in the fourth century, commented on this very reference of Paul's and stated
that some thought Paul meant a "book case" a receptacle for books
(Hom. in loc. vol. XI, p.780, ed. Gaume). Even Jerome mentioned this point
(Epist. 36, ad Damasum).

What
is meant can only be determined by the context, because the word can signify
either a heavy outer coat, a book case or some outer cover for books. Even in
our modern times we have problems in interpreting similar words unless a proper
context is provided. Let me give two illustrations to show the difficulty.

In
these examples we will consider the modern words jacket, wrap and cover,
Suppose a letter were found in which a woman college student wrote her mother.
She said that she wanted her mother to "go to the closet and get out my
heavy jacket and send it to me. It will provide the cover I need from the cold.
I am now using the wrap you gave me for my birthday and it is not warm
enough."

If
such a letter were found, the context makes it clear that the girl is talking
about outer garments in all instances. But what if the following letter were
found, "Go to the bookstore and buy the latest fiction book you wrote me
about. Take the jacket off, because dust wraps on the books annoy me. Make
sure, however, that the book has a hard cover because I don't like
paperbacks."

Though
these two illustrations use exactly the same words, they signify opposite
things. Obviously, no one would get confused over what was intended in either
case, because the contexts are plain as to what was meant. But let us return to
our word phelonen in II Timothy 4:13.
It could mean either a book case, a book wrapper, a book jacket, a book cover,
or it could mean a heavy outer garment. Vincent in his Word Studies had no
objection to it being an ordinary cloak because, like many other modern
translators, he noted that Paul asked Timothy and John Mark to come to Rome
before winter (verse 21). To many scholars this provides the context in which
to interpret phelonen, though
admittedly the reference to winter is eight verses away from the use of the
word. On the other hand, the word phelonen
is found in the very verse (and context) which mentions the scrolls and
parchments that Paul needed. Contextually, it would seem more logical to think
of phelonen as being associated with
literary documents. Indeed, it is even better to consider it that way because
Luke was still with Paul in Rome and surely he could have secured for Paul any
protective garment to keep away the cold during the approaching winter. Would
it be necessary to fetch an outer garment all the way from Troas to keep Paul
covered for the short time he was to remain alive? The fact is, Paul's
reference to winter (verse 21) is by context too far away for the phelonen to mean an actual cloak. But
with the word intimately connected (in a perfect context) with the literary
documents which Paul was urgently requesting Timothy and John Mark to bring
with them, it seems more probable that the interpretation of the Syriac
Version, along with the suggestions found in Chrysostom and Jerome, happen to
be correct. It appears that Paul wanted his important book case (his receptacle
for carrying books) to be brought at once to Rome and the request was one of
pressing necessity.” (Ernest L. Martin, Restoring the Original Bible, ASK Publication: Portland:OR, 1994 pgs. 385-387)

In
this discussion, we can note the interesting point that here is Paul referring
to something which could have been very well made of leather and it was used to
cover books? Very interesting when we consider the whole “tentmaker” argument
because my father endeavored clearly to show that St. Paul was involved in the
construction of books and manuscripts and official documents related to the
Christian Church. Perhaps his trade was one of a leather worker and he just
transferred the knowledge that he had acquired in making leather items, like
tents, to the trade of making books with leather covers and bindings utilizing
leather in their construction? One thing for sure, St. Paul was certainly a
highly educated man whose career path was going not into the private sector,
but his destiny was to be a doctor of the law with the title of Rabbi Saul. He
does not seem to have prepared himself specifically for a life of commercial
enterprise. Let me know what you think on this interesting issue.

Monday, March 04, 2013

I am asking those of you to join me now in
praying the peace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ on all under His
sun suffering from family violence.

I believe that Jesus is
calling all of us who have eyes to see and ears to hear right now to a
new Crusade, a Crusade of Peace, a Crusade of Love, a Crusade of
Reconciliation. Jesus said: My sheep hear my voice. Do you hear Jesus?
Is He speaking to you?

I
believe that the Lord is speaking to us now and calling all of us
committed to "sharing the peace" that we are so used to doing on weekly
holy days to get out of our places of worship and go into the world to
do so, to roll up our sleeves and go to work.

Here we are not
taking about an abstract thing: peace; No, not at all! We are talking
about God who became man and walked among us: Jesus. Jesus is our peace.
It is He who we are asking to lead us to a more peaceful world and I
believe the first place to start where Jesus wants us to work is at
home, in every home.

I have seen on this page something very
special happen since February 26. I ask anyone to simply look at what
has happened since that date. A very simple post made on that day and
'promoted" in the begining for $10.00 US Dollars (which I am still
'promoting" now) has been I believe used by Jesus Christ. I will let you
judge for yourself what you think. I have sent dozens of free ebooks
and profoundly connected with tens of people who I feel are simply just
saying: NO MORE! NO MORE TO FAMILY VIOLENCE INFLICTED ON KIDS IN JESUS
NAME! NO MORE!

From this day forward this page will have as its main focus campaigning for peace.

I have a plan of what I intend to do in this month of March. Before I
talk about that, I would like to hear your view. What is Jesus saying to
you? We are His sheep. Are we hearing His voice?Download Samuel Martin's free ebook - Thy Rod and Thy Staff, They Comfort Me: Christians and the Spanking Controversy here - http://whynottrainachild.com/2013/06/22/download-martins-book/

Follow by Email

Followers

About Me

Samuel Martin was born in England and is the youngest child of Dr. Ernest L. and Helen R. Martin, who are both Americans. He lived in the UK for the first 7 years of his life before moving to the USA with his family at age 7. He lived in the USA until 2001 when he married a native Israeli and relocated to live in Jerusalem. He and his wife, Sonia, have 2 daughters.
His experience with biblical scholarship began at an early age. His father initiated a program in conjunction with Hebrew Univ. and Prof. Benjamin Mazar, where over a 5 year period, some 450 college students came to work on an archaeological excavation in Jerusalem starting in 1969. Since that first trip, Samuel has visited Israel on 14 different occasions living more than 5 years of his life in the country. He has toured all areas of Israel as well as worked in several archaeological excavations.
Today, he has begun his academic career publishing 2 books dealing with biblical issues.
I write regularly on biblical subjects with a particular interest in children, families, nature, science and the Bible,and gender in the Biblical context.